Clam Down...Apple says missing features coming soon.

Wow! Thanks - amazed I hadn't heard about that before.

How is that free when the actually software is so expensive?!

EDIT: Oh, it isn't free... but reasonably priced! Cheers!

@redhavoc, is it still free? havent looked at it for a long time, I tend to cut very responsibly when it comes to flashing in commercials, they did a free period to get it started. Its all a con if you ask me, and professor harding is out to make as much money as he can, how he got that gig i'll never know.

Sign-up is free, tests aren't it seems.

Sure, I think it is a bit of a joke too... but con or not, it has to be done sometimes: I have had a few experiences where the broadcaster required it (for example three occasions with MTV).

Insanely better? More like an insane waste of time!!! With FCP 7 I go to the HD I want and create a folder for my video project. Everything about that project is stored in that folder. The FCP project, the scratch folder, all of it. When I am completely done with the project, and have mastered and archived it, I can just delete that folder on my media drive, and that's it. And I can take that one folder and burn it to a 50 gb blue ray disc or a portable drive for long term storage. If I ever need to work on my project again, it's all in that one folder.

With FCPX you're saying that I would have to go to the "Final Cut Events" folder and hunt and peck to delete the files like I used to with Avid? What a huge waste of time.

No more sequences? That's a horrible Idea!!! I have projects where I will produce several different videos for the same client using a lot of the same material, graphics, music, interviews and such.

In FCP 7 I create a new project, gather all my source material in one project, and edit 4 or 5 videos from that source material using different sequences. Now you're telling me with FCPX I have to create a new project and re-gather all of my material every time I want to create a separate video??? Am I understanding what you are saying correctly? If I am, THAT'S A HUGE WASTE OF TIME!!!!!!!! Time is one thing an editor never has enough of.

It's sort of hard to explain, and it is a lot different, so I am probably not communicating correctly.

First, I forgot how Avid just "throws" everything into the Avid Media Files folder. FCP X does NOT do this. It is same in the sense that all the files MUST live under the folder "Final Cut Events" similar to how Avid files must live under "Avid Media Files" folder. The difference, however, is FCP X puts the files under even more folders. It is actually very organized in Finder.

I completely agree with you that it is very dumb how Avid just throws it all in there unorganized, which is one reason I really don't like Avid.

I took a screenshot of the filestructure. See if that makes sense:

All of those folders and files FCP X created and organized on its own. I did not create any of those files or folders. I simply designated my drive and imported.

Referring to your sequences, I think you are misunderstanding. I will clear something up:

**The term "Project" is NOT what you know from FCP 7**

It is somewhat confusing, since you are used to Projects as being your main file in which everything you do is stored. The term "Project" is now more similar to "Sequence". I say similar because the whole program is so different, it is difficult to relate any one thing to be identical to FCP 7 (well, except maybe the selector and blade tool, of course, but even those I think can act differently depending on the circumstance).

Hopefully I helped clear that up.

If it's so confusing, then that makes it not as 'intuitive' and 'paradigm-shifting'.

There are some pretty cool features in FCPX like grouping and sub-sequencing tracks into a new sequence (very similar to After Effects CS5) - but the foundations that FCPX is built upon is greatly underwhelming and overly-simplified.

It also seems that Apple is 'marketing' the new FCPX UI as 'starting from scratch', but its apparent that the 'new UI' is just a marketing ploy when in reality, it is iMovie on crack.

I think we all need to hit all the Apple discussion board threads that are ignoring the glaring faults of FCPX and set the record straight so that potential buyers of FCPX can understand why FCPX is unsuitable for professional use

And that anyone who aspires to become a professional editor/filmmaker/producer should probably consider how adopting FCPX pipeline will negatively affect the future projections of their companies and careers.

Sadly, FCPX is a dead end on the professional level. And anyone aspiring to work at a professional level must be warned.

FCP -- RIP 2011

Excellent point!

You see, the issue is that I cannot buy Final Pro 7 anymore. FROM ANYWHERE. Well, except for Ebay maybe. People are going to make a killing selling their licenses now at way over original value for the product.

See, the argument of "Well, you still have FCP 7, it didn't stop working" are invalid if I cannot buy the old version anymore. All I can buy is FCPX 1.0

I agree that it sort of is iMovie on crack (lots of automated stuff, the simplified interface, etc.) With that, is that such a bad thing? Isn't something that is (potentially) easier to use make it so you can get your work done faster? (there are some AWESOME new tools. One of my favorites is Append)

I would agree that it was probably released too early as an "official" release. If apple had put the word "BETA" behind the title, I would imagine that would have solved everyone's complaints, because then that holds hope for "fixing the missing stuff", and no one can submit a bad review without getting pounded by others cause everyone would just say "it's just a beta. relax. they will fix it when the full version comes out"

They didn't do that.

So I'd say that was a mistake on their behalf (I think they have gottan to used to keeping everything a secret) and is seriously backfiring.

With that, Version 10.0 is not the last version. Wait a few months. I suspect multicam and other missing features (like upgrading from FCP 7 projects) is in the future.

Oh, and one more thing, I agree that it is NOT ready for a full production level use. As in, in its current state, it will by no means at all replace FCP 7 (yet).

beverins wrote:

You see, the issue is that I cannot buy Final Pro 7 anymore. FROM ANYWHERE. Well, except for Ebay maybe. People are going to make a killing selling their licenses now at way over original value for the product.

See, the argument of "Well, you still have FCP 7, it didn't stop working" are invalid if I cannot buy the old version anymore. All I can buy is FCPX 1.0

I don't really understand. If you weren't using the old version, then I'm not sure why it matters to you? Whatever you were using before was/is working fine before FCP X came out

Yeah -- I agree that the FCPX launch was premature.

But what irks me is that all the pro-FCPX'rs seem to think that the naysayers are opposed to innovation and improvement. That by disagreeing with Apple's take of what an editing solution should be, means we are anti-Apple -- and thus, anti-innovation. The argument is misaligned because of the powerful branding and association of Apple with innovation.

Anti-FCPX'rs want innovation - they want their editing system to be better than FCP7! The problem isn't that Apple is trying to innovate editing.

The problem is that FCPX isn't innovative. FCPX is cannabalizing the iMovie foundations but is being 'marketed' as innovative when it's not. That is the source of the disillusionment so many professionals and FCP-loyalists have against FCPX -- because false marketing is lying and we feel lied to.

Furthermore, professionals have to CEASE using FCPX because it doesn't fit with our professional workflows.

And the reason why professionals will have to cease using FCPX is because FCPX doesn't deliver even the basic necessities that professionals require to make a living -- it doesn't allow for aspiring professionals to familiarize themselves with the professional process and workflows of shops and post-houses across the world.

By closing off FCPX from the rest of the professional workflows across the world, FCPX is damning everyone who works in FCPX to stay in FCPX. That is the philosphical direction Steve Jobs has been pushing Apple which is evidenced by his push with iOS and anti-Flash policy.

And that trend is in direct opposition to the trend of the democratization of technology and the sharing of information that has propelled social media and technology today.

FCP -- RIP 2011

All this crying from you all is going to cause the forums to become a "**** and moan" station. I mean ****, maybe FCP X isn't as good as the previous release, I am sure that Apple is reading these posts and they are working on some updates tpo better assist you (the ********). Just relax and give it a week or two.

@ beverins - Very true. Sorry for your loss. Wish Apple could help you there. Even if you purchase/use FCPX in the hopes that Apple will release some sort of update that will make it more relevant, that update is still 6-8months away. What's even more troubling is that it seems the problems with FCPX is deeper than an update - it's at the very foundations of FCPX itself --- since it is based on the iMovie platform.

But the problem you are facing right now is a problem that professionals will be facing in the next year -- what do we do post-FCP??

My shop is already looking into the Adobe Premiere CS5 pipeline (since we use other Adobe products extensively), and we're also looking into the Avid Media Composer 5.5 pipeline. Chances are, we'll invest in both and in a year, see which one is the better solution.

This is a testament to how big of a hole FCPX and the death of the FCP-pipeline is leaving in the professional editing market.

FCP -- RIP 2011

@NightNinjaPDX -- this is a discussion about FCPX and its significant impact on our industry and livelihood.

If you read up the thread, you'll see all the points made about why FCPX is unsuitable for professional use. The main reason this is a major talking point here on Apple's discussion board is because Apple marketed FCPX as a professional tool when its pricing and UI-design is apparently targeted for a more amateur/prosumer market.

It is our hope that Apple is reading these discussion boards to not just improve FCPX, but hopefully abandon it altogether and re-continue their highly successful FCP-line.

And the reason for the uproar is based on the fact that most professionals will have to kill their FCP-pipeline because of the limitations and misguidance of FCPX. Why do professionals have to ditch FCP-pipelines?

Because FCPX does not allow the editor to interact with other platforms -- which is paramount in a professional production environment.

FCP -- RIP 2011

NightNinja.... I think you need to read the actual posts and stop acting like we are all a bunch of babies who cannot handle change. We're all about improvement and new ideas... but we STILL have to work in a pro environment. These have very specific technical demands which FCP X clearly doesn't meet.

Doug Stringham wrote:

NightNinja.... I think you need to read the actual posts and stop acting like we are all a bunch of babies who cannot handle change. We're all about improvement and new ideas... but we STILL have to work in a pro environment. These have very specific technical demands which FCP X clearly doesn't meet.

/agreed